Breaking! Judge Eileen Cannon Tells Jack Smith to GFY! --- Declines His 'Unprecedented and Unjust' Opposition Filing Against Her Jury Instructions

The indictments cover all of the counts listed in each indictment, dupe. So it isn’t wrong to say Trump has 91 indictments.
You’re making a twat argument.
Each indictment contains multiple counts which total to 91 counts and not indictments. A box of cereal has many cheerios but it’s only one box.
 
Each indictment contains multiple counts which total to 91 counts and not indictments. A box of cereal has many cheerios but it’s only one box.
A distinction without a difference.
Each charge is an indictment. It matters not if there’s one or forty.

Either way it’s a twat argument. As if four indictments is somehow better. :uhoh3:
 
This particular brouhaha is premised on the judge’s request for alternative instructions for the jury depending on how she ultimately rules.

Jack Smith then has a hissy fit.

Jack Smith should hang his head in shame.
The alternative instructions are unacceptable and will mislead the jury into taking into consideration Trump's erroneous and ridiculous personal interpretation of what he THINKS the PRA says, when it does not say that.
The jury should not be allowed to consider the "ifs" of whether or not Trump "thought" the stolen documents were his personal property based upon what he "believed" the PRA allows.
Their instructions should be black and white.
Was Trump in possession of unauthorized classified materials?
Yes.
Does/did the PRA allow Trump to possess these materials in the manner that he did?
No.
Did Trump exibit a pattern of obstructing the governmen's attempts to retrieve these materials?
Based upon the evidence, yes.
GUILTY.
 
Each indictment contains multiple counts which total to 91 counts and not indictments. A box of cereal has many cheerios but it’s only one box.
It is down to only 88 felony charges now contained in 4 separate indictments.
 
The alternative instructions are unacceptable and will mislead the jury into taking into consideration Trump's erroneous and ridiculous personal interpretation of what he THINKS the PRA says, when it does not say that.
The jury should not be allowed to consider the "ifs" of whether or not Trump "thought" the stolen documents were his personal property based upon what he "believed" the PRA allows.
Their instructions should be black and white.
Was Trump in possession of unauthorized classified materials?
Yes.
Does/did the PRA allow Trump to possess these materials in the manner that he did?
No.
Did Trump exibit a pattern of obstructing the governmen's attempts to retrieve these materials?
Based upon the evidence, yes.
GUILTY.
Nope.
 
Yep
And that is part of the reason Smith needs to formally ask Cannon to recuse berself next week. When she refuses he can then appeal to The 11th circuit.
She's already been shot down by The 11th for rulings that were described as "wildly off base and untethered to common law practices."
There is an above average chance she will be removed from the case for this obvious pattern of trying to bend the law in Trump's favor.
 
Last edited:
Your uninformed opinion is duly noted troll boi.
Now wipe that drool off your chin.
Troll bitch ^ can’t stop itself.

Since you’re incapable of posting without trolling, imma gonna just put you and your always idiotic and dishonest posting efforts on ignore.

Bye bye troll bitch. :fu:
 
Troll bitch ^ can’t stop itself.

Since you’re incapable of posting without trolling, imma gonna just put you and your always idiotic and dishonest posting efforts on ignore.

Bye bye troll bitch. :fu:
Good riddance.
 

Forum List

Back
Top